I might be wrong and perhaps furious in judging or analyzing something but I do not find it sensible to make myriad plans/missions/projects/schemes/conventions/laws for a purpose. 

For instance, In 1985, when congress was in power, a project was launched for rejuvenation of river Ganga. In 2015, another action plan was launched by Modi government. 30 years have passed, renaming of the project is continuous while there are no signals of improvement. 

This is just a small chronological example to contextualize the matter. Actual haphazardness has multiple dimensions. Up to a certain extent, chronological restructuring is understandable and justifiable but what is happening now?  In order to achieve an objective, multiple projects are launched and they are further subdivided and classified in different bodies. 

 I visualize it as a student who tops in theoretical exam but fail to deliver in practical. 

Aren't we actually making process and structure complex and ambiguous to implement? Does it not waste so much time and money? Is everything get implemented accordingly? If not, then who is responsible for that? If you believe in systematically designed top-down approach, did you attempt to go in depth and analyze the outcome on ground level?

Rhetorical representation of vision is easy. Difficult is to answer these questions.